FDA Sued Over Electronic Cigarette Embargo

[Rob Smallenberg]

The Judge will hear arguments on Smoking Everywhere's ("SE") motion for a preliminary injunction on 5/15.

In order to be awarded a preliminary injunction, SE must establish:

(1) likelihood of success on the merits;
(2) irreparable harm if preliminary relief is not granted;
(3) the balance of hardships tips in the plainitff's favor; and
(4) the public interest in a preliminary injunction.

Personally, I think SE is going to lose. But, we'll see.

[Sun Vaporer]

The Judge will hear arguments on Smoking Everywhere's ("SE") motion for a preliminary injunction on 5/15.

In order to be awarded a preliminary injunction, SE must establish:

(1) likelihood of success on the merits;
(2) irreparable harm if preliminary relief is not granted;
(3) the balance of hardships tips in the plainitff's favor; and
(4) the public interest in a preliminary injunction.

Personally, I think SE is going to lose. But, we'll see.

Rob, Thanks for the update on the Court Docket. This should be very interesting to say the least----Sun

[skex]

The Judge will hear arguments on Smoking Everywhere's ("SE") motion for a preliminary injunction on 5/15.

In order to be awarded a preliminary injunction, SE must establish:

(1) likelihood of success on the merits;
(2) irreparable harm if preliminary relief is not granted;
(3) the balance of hardships tips in the plainitff's favor; and
(4) the public interest in a preliminary injunction.

Personally, I think SE is going to lose. But, we'll see.

I disagree, The judge in this case actually seems sincere in his small government stance, He was the one who found in favor of GITMO detainees claims to habeus corpus in opposition to the justice dept.

Honestly I don't think SE couldn't have gotten a better judge for this case.

[Smokingfreely]

Were these detainees US citizens? Wouldn't expanding the US constitution to non-US citizens seem a fairly liberal minded action to you? There must a contract for there to be a "right" to anything, and our constitution is an agreement between the government and its citizens.

[skex]

Were these detainees US citizens? Wouldn't expanding the US constitution to non-US citizens seem a fairly liberal minded action to you? There must a contract for there to be a "right" to anything, and our constitution is an agreement between the government and its citizens.

The Constitution is a control on the actions of the Federal Government the citizenship of the individuals it is trying to act upon is irrelevant.

Consider the wording the Bill of Rights does not say that the government shall not pass laws denying U.S Citizens their rights to free speech and freedom of Religion it say that the government shall pass no Law regarding etc.

That is a strict reading of the constitution. Trying to apply those protections based on citizenship is the loose interpretation.

[Smokingfreely]

"The Ratification of the Conventions of nine States, shall be sufficient for the Establishment of this Constitution between the States so ratifying the Same."

Look at the lanuguage here - The consititution was formed from a confederation of states who agreed on certain priniciples when founding one central Federal government - that's it! It has no bearing on any non-citizen. It is a very liberal idea to expand the scope of the constitution to non-citizens.

[Nicotine]

"The Ratification of the Conventions of nine States, shall be sufficient for the Establishment of this Constitution between the States so ratifying the Same."

Look at the lanuguage here - The consititution was formed from a confederation of states who agreed on certain priniciples when founding one central Federal government - that's it! It has no bearing on any non-citizen. It is a very liberal idea to expand the scope of the constitution to non-citizens.

Yes please stop expanding! One corrupt "Super Power" is enough thanks.

[anonymousdrifter]

hey what do we need for another tea party
how about a nic juice party

how many years has the sky high tobacco taxs (as well as alcohol taxs yes) been paying for how much in this counrty it's time we got a break for our health

[Smokingfreely]

Yeah, I thought maybe smokers should organize a "cigarette party," while no economist/historian, I'm sure the tax on tea was a pittance compared to the taxes they keep slapping on smokes!

[Rookie]

[quote=Smokingfreely;258597]Yeah, I thought maybe smokers should organize a "cigarette party," while no economist/historian, I'm sure the tax on tea was a pittance compared to the taxes they keep slapping on smokes![/quote]

You are an unpatriotic soul (just ask VP Biden) and just think of all the poor children you are depriving of their health insurance. The S-Chip program is funded by tobacco taxes. How dare you put your selfish health and financial concerns above the NEEDS of the government